quorum call:: quorum call:

s

mr. durbin: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from illinois. mr. durbin: i ask unanimous consent the quorum call be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: mr. president, it's my understanding we're postcloture speaking on the nomination of harold koh to be legal advisor for the department of state. is that correct? the presiding officer: that is correct. mr. durbin: thank you. earlier today the senate voted to move forward with this nomination. 65 senators recognized the extraordinary qualifications mr. koh will bring to the state department. in the last few weeks some senators on the other side of the aisle have done everything they can to slow down the work of the senate, even going so far as to delay the consideration of the bill to promote tourism in america. a noncontroversial bill with 11 republican cosponsors but a bill that could get only two

republican senators to support it when we asked to move it forward. untphorpbl, the same thing is happening with the -- unfortunately the same thing is happening with the nomination of mr. koh. this is a nomination that is noncontroversial. 65 supported going forward. yet the republicans are insisting, as they have the right to do under senate rules, that we delay for maybe up to 30 hours before we actually get to the vote. if we're going to waste that much time on a noncontroversial nomination for a person to become legal advisor to the state department, the people of this country have a right to ask what is the goal of the republicans in doing this? there's a lot of things we need to do in the senate. there's a lot of things the american people are counting on us to do, measures we should be considering. i have a bipartisan measure on food safety. i've been working on this for over ten years. there isn't a week that goes by that there isn't some new press report about something

dangerous. pet food, cookie dough, you name it. all of these things have been in the headlines over the last several years, and we could do a better job making sure that the items that you purchase on -- at your family's store, for your family, for your pet are safe. making things we import from other countries are safe. we can't even get to that measure because there's a strategy on the republican side of the aisle to stop us, to delay it as much as possible. to try to make sure the senate does as little as possible. the last election the people of this country said we think it's time for a change in this town of washington. we're sick and tired of this partisan bickering and this wasted time and democrats banging heads with republicans. why don't y'all roll up your sleeves and try to solve a problem. you may not get it completely right, but do your best. and work at it. spend some time on it.

look at what we have here, an empty chamber, a senate chamber that should be filled with debate on critical issues. but it's not because unfortunately there's a procedural strategy on from the other side of the aisle which is slowing us down. this man whose nomination is before us should have skated through here. this is an extraordinarily talented man. mr. koh, mr. harold koh has a long and distinguished history of serving this country and the legal profession. during the reagan administration -- a republican president's administration -- he was a career lawyer in the office of legal counsel at the department of justice. in 1998, unanimously confirmed as the u.s. assistant secretary. mr. koh's academic credentials are amazing. a marshal scholar at oxford, a graduate of harvard law school, editor of the harvard law review

and he went on to be a clerk at the supreme court across the street, which is about as good as it gets going out of law school. since 2004 harold koh was a dean at a law school. he's been awarded 11 honorary degrees and 30 human rights awards. i don't know that you could present a stronger resume for a man who wants to serve our country to be involved in public service and step out of his professional life as a lawyer in the private sector and with law schools. he's been endorsed by leaders, legal scholars from both political parties including former solicitor general ted olson, ken starr, josh bolten, seven former department of state legal advisers, including three republicans, more than 100 law school teens and 600 law professors from around the country what more do we ask for

someone who wants to serve this country? several retired high-ranking military lawyers have written if the u.s. follows koh's advice as state department legal adviser -- quote -- "we will once again be the shining example of a nation advancing human rights that we want other countries to emulate." here's an excerpt for support ken starr sent to senators kerry and lugar. i've had my differences with kenneth starr. politically we're kind of on opposite sides. here's what he he said of dean koh who is considered of by this empty chamber. he wrote that my -- firsthand knowledge, we've been vigorous adversaries in litigation. we embrace different perspectives about a variety of substantive issues. as citizens we no doubt vote quite differently. but based on my two decades of interaction with harold, i'm firmly convinced that harold is

extraordinarily well qualified to serve with distinction. harold's background is the essence of the american dream. harold embraces deeply a vision of the goodness of america and the ideals of a nation ruled abidingly by law. end quote. this is overwhelming support for harold koh. usually these nominations are done routinely at night when there are few people on the floor and we're going through a long series of things to do. someone with this kind of background doesn't even slow down as they move through the senate on to public service. but, unfortunately, the strategy on the other side of the aisle is to slow things down and do as little as possible this week. well, i sincerely hope that when the time comes, when the 30 hours have run, when the republicans have finally decided that they don't want to delay the senate any longer, that they will bring mr. koh's nomination to a vote. i enthusiastically support his nomination an encourage my

colleagues to join me in voting him out of the senate quickly so he can continue his record of public service. now, mr. president, i ask for unanimous consent to speak as if in morning business and my following remarks be placed at a separate point in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: thank you very much. mr. president, you're well aware from your state of oregon and from my state of illinois, how much this health care reform debate means to everybody we represent. when you ask the american people what we can do about health insurance, 94% of the people across america overwhelmingly support change in our current health care system. 85% of the people across this country, democrats, republicans, and independents, say that the health care system needs to be fundamentally changed. well, this is the time to do it. this is the president to lead us in doing that. and we better seize this moment. if we don't, if we miss it, we may never have another chance for years and years to come, and that's unfortunate. democrats want to build on

what's good about the current system. it's interesting that so many people would say we should change the health care system, but three out of four say i kind of like my health insurance. so what we've got to do first is to say, we're going to keep the things in the current system that work and only fix those things that are broken. if you have a health insurance plan that you like and you trust that's good for you and your team, you ought to be able to keep it. we shouldn't be able to take it away from you, we don't want to. that's the starting point. and then when we start to fix what's broken in the system, we address some issues that i think are really critical. health insurance companies today can deny you coverage because of an illness you i might -- you might have had years ago, exclude coverage for what they call preexisting conditions, which, sadly, we all know about, or charge you vastly more because of your health status or your age. we want to make sure that at the end of the day after health care reform, that we keep the costs under control, make sure that you have a choice of your

doctor, make certain that you have privacy in dealing with your doctor, so the doctor-patient relationship is protected and confidential. we want to protect quality in the system to make certain that we bring out the very best in medical care and not reward those who are doing things poorly. and we believe that we can do this on a bipartisan basis with both parties working together. now, some of the critics of this effort basically deny -- they're in denial that we need to change our health care system. i don't think that they're really taking the time it look at it closely. whether you talk to people -- average families or small businesses, large corporations, you understand that the cost of health care now is spinning out of control. that if we don't do something dramatic and significant about it, that it will become unaffordable. i just had a group of people in

my office who are in the communications industry, they're union workers. and they're worried because every year when they get more money per hour for working, it all goes to health insurance. and they learn each year that there's less coverage. pay more, get less. we have to do something about containing the cost of a system that is the most expensive health care system in the world. we spend on average more than twice as much as the next country on earth for health care for americans. now, we have great hospitals and doctors. we have amazing technology and pharmacies. but the bottom line is many other countries get better results for fewer dollars. and so the first item we must address is bring down the cost of health care, stop it from going through the roof so that families and businesses can afford it and governments can afford it as well. the second thing we've got to make sure we do is to protect the choice of individuals for their doctor and their hospital,

their providers. now there are limitations now. in my hometown of springfield, illinois, my health insurance plan tells me there is one preferred hospital of the two i could choose. i know if i don't go to that hospital, i could end up with a bill that i have to pay personally. so there are limitations under the current system. that is to be expected. we want to limit those to as few as possible so that people are able to come forward and have the basic choice they want in physicians. then there's a question about how to keep the cost under control. if we're going to build this new health care reform on private health insurance, the obvious question is: will there be a medical insurance plan like medicare available. so you can look at all of the private health insurance plans you might buy and also consider the government health insurance plan, the public health insurance plan as an option. this is controversial. health insurance companies say

if we have to compete with a government plan, they'll always charge less and we won't be able to compete. others argue that if you don't have at least one nonprofit entity offering health insurance, then basically the private health insurance plans will continue to be too expensive. they won't have the kind of competition they need that bring about real savings. many people on the other side of the aisle have come to the floor and criticized the idea of a public health insurance -- public health insurance plan, and they argue that it's government insurance, government health care. but most americans know that government health care is not a scary thing in and of itself. 40 million americans are under medicare. that's a government health care program. millions of americans are protected by medicaid for lower-income people in our country. that has a government component too. our veterans come back from war

and go into the veterans administration, a government health program. i've not heard a single republican come to the floor and say, we need to eliminate medicare, eliminate medicaid, close the v.a. hospitals because it's all government health care. no, for most people being served by these programs, they believe that they're god sends a they don't want to lose them. yesterday the minority leader, the republican senator from kentucky, came to the floor and talked about a future which is fictitious. he said a government plan where care is denied, delayed, and rationed. well, those are fighting words because nobody wants their coverage denied. they don't want to wait in a long line for surgery, and they don't want to believe they're victims of rationing when it's important for them to have medical care given to them. the language that we hear from the other side of the aisle is language we're all-too familiar with. the miracle of the internet is

that people can come up with a written document now and just by pressing a button or clicking a mouse, they can send that document to lots of different people. well, a couple of months ago there is a republican strategist named frank luntz who wrote a 28-page memo to give to republican senators on how to defeat health care. and doctor -- he calls himself doctor, dr. luntz said that whatever they come up with, here is the way to beat it. so he had not seen the health care reform plan that president obama might support or the democrats might produce. but he says this is how we stop them from passing anything, how we delay things, deny things. and he used those words. he said we've got to use words that americans will identify with, buzzwords like deny, delay, and ration. and those are the words we hear every week now from the other side of the aisle. the reason i mentioned the internet is it turns out

somebody punched the wrong button on the computer, clicked the wrong mouse and the next thing you know that memo spread across washington. everybody has it. so we've seen the playbook. we kind of know the plays they're running. we know their speeches before they give them, but they still come down and give these speeches over and over again. i guess the starting point is this: some of my colleagues and friends on the other side of the aisle want to keep the current health care system. they think it's fine. they don't want to change it. well, i don't join them. and most american people don't join them either. there are winners in the current system. there are people making a lot of money under the current health care system. health insurance companies, they're one of the few sectors of the economy last year, 2008, that showed profitability when most american companies were not, health insurance companies were profitable and so were oil companies incidentally. but the health insurance companies making a lot of money, they don't want to see the

system changed. it is a good, profitable system for them. by and large they want to keep it the way it is. and there are some providers who are doing quite well under the system too. some specialists making a lot of money, some hospitals are making a lot of money. they want to keep it just as it is. we know that we can't. it is unsustainable. it is too expensive for individuals and families and businesses and for government for us not to get the costs under control. tt republican resistance to change in health care reform is not surprising. last week we had a cloture vote and 30 hours of debate to proceed to the consideration of a bipartisan noncontroversial bill. we've been through cloture votes an procedural delays all this week. we're in the milledle of -- middle of one right now. that's why those visiting the capitol are wondering were all of the senators are are, this is situation where the republicans decided we're going to wait 30 hours before we do something. a waste of time that we can't

afford to waste. and we faced it before. we have to understand that we need to have health care reform. that the president is right that this opportunity comes around so rarely. we have pretty good health insurance as members of congress. but i want to make it clear for the record, we don't have special health insurance. i've heard that argument being made. man, if you could just get the same health insurance your senator has, you'd be set for life. we have great health insurance, but it's the same health insurance available to all federal employees. two million federal employees, eight million employees and their families, we have the federal health benefits program and we have an open enrollment each year to pick, in my case from nine different health insurance plans available to me in my home state of illinois for my wife and myself. that is a luxury most people can only dream of. all federal employees have it and so do members of congress because we're considered federal

employees for this. but it is something that most americans don't have and we can really make available to small and large businesses alike. it's important that we do this. and i hope that we can get some support -- some support from the other side of the aisle. today in america while we're going about our business, 14,000 americans will wake up and realize something, yesterday they had health insurance and today they doesn't. every day in america 14,000 americans lose their health insurance. i can't imagine what life is like without health insurance. there was a a time in my life i didn't have it, it was scary. brand-new, married, father, baby on the way, and no health insurance. it happened. we made it through with a lot of bills that took years to pay off. and that goes back a long time. currently without health insurance, you're one diagnoses or one accident away from being wiped out. so going after bringing the cost of help insurance down is our first priority, but the second thing is to me